Bush as Messiah

Bob points below to Bush's tautological explanation of why it was legal for him to order illegal wiretaps and email intercepts on US citizens: that because he ordered it, and because he "shares some concerns" about our civil liberties and has sworn to uphold the law, therefore it is legal. This amounts to a declaration that anything Bush does is, by definition, within the law. No matter what the law says.

This circular argument is so absurdly logic-defying that it seems more like the plot device in a Mel Brooks movie than the governing philosophy of our nation's leadership. And yet this is exactly the argument advanced in the two infamous legal memoranda of UC Berkeley (Boalt) Law Professor John Yoo: the first "torture memo", which argued that only the most extreme torments qualify as torture under US law; and the second, which argued that the President had ultimate authority to conduct whatever activity he considered necessary in prosecuting the "war on terror", thanks to the "inherent executive power" granted his office by the Constitution. (Boy! For a crowd that claims to favor strict construction of that document...)

Anyway, we are not used to encountering this argument of "Because I do it, it must be right" in our day to day lives. And there is a good reason for that. In fact, to my knowledge there is only one entity prior to George W. Bush who satisfied this claim: namely, the Lord made flesh, i.e. Jesus. Or more broadly: Jesus, plus those occasional dictator kings who also claimed the godhead.

So for those of you that had your suspicions about this, I argue, here is your proof: Dubyah considers himself our Risen Savior.

Merry Bushmas!